05 RE XXX vs RE MX..

[steveBeatz]

LOLOLOL im just ****in with you RE XXX RELAXX!!!!!! lets stop fighting here.. look at my gf and cheer up!!! she sucks a mean dick //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/biggrin.gif.d71a5d36fcbab170f2364c9f2e3946cb.gif seriously..

 

[RE_XXX]

Idk maybe it had to do with box design or impedance rise in your case. All the XBL^2 subs ive had the pleasure of running ive found to be rather efficient. When i did increase the power on my XXXs they did get a little louder(obviously because of power increase) but it wasn't to the point where it was a ridiculous amount.
I have read up on XBL^2 in the past and realize that it wasn't designed to be efficient but i think that the real world applications were a bit different than the designed plan for it.

I guess it seemed to me that they were rather efficient compared to others i have run in the past. And especially compared to the new XXX/MX.

I guess its just a experience thing maybe, yes they are more efficient than the new XXX and MX, but with a DB efficiency rating of 86 (iirrcc) that just isnt very impressive, as to where my previous driver have been close to 95.

 

[CobraStang98 10+ year member]

I guess its just a experience thing maybe, yes they are more efficient than the new XXX and MX, but with a DB efficiency rating of 86 (iirrcc) that just isnt very impressive, as to where my previous driver have been close to 95.

I mean i have alot of experience with different subs over the last like 3-4 years. I mean the old XXX doesn't compare to say a SI Mag efficiency wise. But i wouldn't say its inefficient in real world applications.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

XBL^2 does not make the sub any more or less efficient thanb it would have otherwise been without the enormous top plate and extra material removed for the xbl^2 gap. Dan Wiggins, inventor of the xbl^2 design, has said this, many times.

With that said, the old XXX was not hugely efficient. Most subs these days are not, by design. Hoffman's Iron Law tells us if you want good low freq extension AND a small enclosure, you must have an inefficient sub. But yes, when comparing to an MX, or a new model XXX in their advertised but way-too-small enclosure, the older XXX's do seem efficient.